HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013-4-10Minutes for April 9, 2013, adopted Oct. 2
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
®r�. 2 Bathing Beach Road
�, Nantucket, Massachusetts 02554
� www da , April 10, 2 13
�0 Wednesday, April 10, 2013 4:00 P.M.
Ra 2nd Floor Training Room, 4 Fairgrounds Road
Commissioners: Ernie Steinauer (Chair), Sarah Oktay (Vice- chair), John Braginton- Smith, Jennifer
Karberg Andrew Bennett Jan Golding Michael Glowacki
Called to order at 4:08 p.m.
Staff in attendance: J. Carlson, Natural Resources Coordinator; T. Norton, Town Minutes Taker
Attending Members: Steinauer, Cluny, Karberg, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Absent Members: Braginton -Smith y
Late Arrivals: Oktay 6:10 p.m. y u
Agenda adopted by unanimous consent
° S
'Matter has not been heard m m
L PUBLIC MEETING
A. Public Comment - None —1 rri
° a <
11. PUBLIC HEARING 2 frl
A. Fertilizer
Sitting Steinauer, Karberg, Bennett, Golding, Glowacki r
Recused None rn
a
co
Documentation Copy of Town of Nantucket Wetlands Regulations , Article 68 Fertilizerdtegulations
Public Emily MacKinnon, Resource Ecologist Nantucket Land Council
Kelly Omand, Research Technician/Field Supervisor Nantucket Conservation Foundation and Chair
Invasive Plant Species Committee
Ben Champoux, Champoux Landscaping
John Mills
Lee Saperstein, Dean Emeritus of the School of Mines and Metallurgy and Professor Emeritus of
Mining Engineering at the University of Missouri -Rolla
Lucinda Young, Landscaper
Mark Lucas, Nantucket Golf Course Manager
Mike Misurelli, Nantucket Landscape Association President
Contuse Collier, Executive Director Nantucket Land Council
Discussion:
Steinauer— This hearing is to talk about adopting the regulations as adopted by the BOS and Best Management
Practices (BMP) as a guideline. The point is m ensure the ConCom fertilizer regulations are not in conflict with or
dependent upon the Board of Health (BOH) regulations.
Carlson — ConCom addresses the use of fertilizer in a couple of performance standards and again at the end of the
regulations; a lot of times this commission doesn't deal with it at all. Had been dealing with fertilizers under an
unwritten policy as far as the practices of use with the buffer zones. Hoping to make it clearer to applicants what the
standards and expectations are for use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides within the 100 foot buffer zone.
Glowacki — Asked if the subject comes up that often.
Golding — Protocols come up frequently for use on invasive species.
Carlson — Also see standard fertilizers filed in applications which vary consultant to consultant. ConCom does not have
a regulatory document that clearly deals with fertilizer in amounts and quantities allowed. BON has adopted a set of
regulations, BOH Regulations 75.00, which is tied to the document adopted by the Board of Selectmen (BOS). The
BOB document references the BMP liberally. The Natural Resources office has been tasked in aiding the
implementation of both the BMP and the BOH regulations. Recommends, as the Administrator, that the regulations
need a clearer definition on what ConCom can and cannot do; presently the regulations don't address it at all, which
makes it difficult to regulate.
Steinauer — Have looked at the Regulations as a baseline approach that a homeowner can understand. The BMP is more
nuanced and directed toward professional landscapers and land managers; it is more detailed and addresses a broader
range of topics with the intention of minimizing nutrient impacts in resource areas. Areas under ConCom jurisdiction
are the most sensitive areas as far as impact to wetland resources. Described the process by which the regulations
were drafted and the consultants who advised the Article 68 Work Group and reviewed the documents. The BMP
provides a ready -made set of protocols for fertilizer application and suggested that the 25 -foot buffer be considered a
no-application zone.
Carlson — Another aspect of ConCom adopting fertilizer protocols in conjunction with the BOH and BOS is so that the
applicant has consistency of standards and rules among the Town boards. Stated that the BMP is posted on the Town
Page 1 of 5
Minutes for
web site under the Article 68 page as well as having been mailed out. Stated he misspoke, the ConCom Regulations
do not have any specific performance standards that relate directly to fertilizer use in wetland resource areas.
Misurelli — The difficulty is coming up with a product that meets the standards of slow - release versus the amount of
nitrogen that goes down in one application. The BMP is a little ahead of the product. Talking to different suppliers
about coming up with formulations that meets those standards.
Lucas — There are some products available but not easily available and not on Nantucket. Any communication with
vendors has not yet happened. If there is a market for it, it will wine. Stated he and Mr. Mills and the Miacomet Golf
Manager were talking to the fertilizer salesman about coming up with a Nantucket formula.
Champoux — Will need an educational program for homeowners and landscaping industry to help understand how to use
the product.
Misurelli — The granular sizes will need to be really small to achieve this so the calibration and education part will be
very important.
Saperstein — The Article 68 Work Group submitted a report once the article was done with a two -page synopsis of the
regulations that could be easily disseminated, that exists. There was a suggestion for a card with a scale that shows
how deeply the grass/garden is being watered and a key on it. Also suggested putting the electronic versions in a
prominent location on the Town web site.
Glowacki — Whatever ConCom decides to do, cross referencing would be a big help.
Collier — Had the responsibility of being the sole person to administer and educate the public and Town employees about
the BMP and Regulations and taking them out of the BOH control and putting them in the Natural Resources
Department. Stated the Mr. Carlson had suggested a putting forth an Implementation Committee to take place in June
and July; in the interim talked about doing a work shop in terms of topics dealing with calibration and focus on BMP.
Have printed and distributed the BMP to include a Spanish version as well as a brochure for homeowners. Also Mr.
Carlson and I offered to attend any home - owners or civic association to talk about the BMP. It should be industry
driven and there should be an Implementation Committee and a licensing program to go into effect over the next
winter.
Steinauer— The Regulations recommend a license to commercially apply fertilizer.
Carlson — That is part of the BOH regulations, and one of the tasks is M create on a licensing course and an exam. Have
started work on that. In talking to Town Administration, the hope is for the Implementation Committee to be formed
before June. The committee will have to be driven by people affected by the regulations. This time next year hope the
discussions will be on how it is going and about the first round of courses and exams.
Saperstein — Like the fact that commercial landscapers will be licensed in use and application. A homeowner applying
fertilizer would follow the threshold guidance in the regulations.
Golding — Asked if a bulk mailing to homeowners would shift the dynamics.
Glowacki — Suggest the commission request Mr. Carlson bring back a draft of the working document.
Carlson — The easiest way to address that is to have in the Regulations a performance standard that addresses each of the
wetlands to which this applies. Suggested wording: all chemical products are prohibited from the 0 to 25 and beyond
the 25 -foot buffer zone the application of materials must be in accordance with the Town- adopted BMP for fertilizer
use. Suggested also attaching a copy of the BMP to the ConCom regulation.
Karberg — Questions the use of the term "chemical."
Saperstein — In the BMP, it says no phosphate or phosphorous fertilizer unless a need is shown through a soil test. Given
the sensitivity of lands ConCom works with, the commission should consider whether or not an applicant should
show a soil test.
Carlson — Any data ConCom can gather on -site test is beneficial. Don't think it is a lot to ask for justification for the
product they want to use.
Steinauer — Stated the belief the consultants will be on board with that. Most applicants are fresh -water buffers.
Golding — Dr. Oktay had expressed concern should the BOH Regulations be changed and then ConCom protocols would
not be in sync.
Steinauer — ConCom would want to review the BOH Regulations.
Carlson — Can include the BMP into the performance standards or adopt them now; that would be the current copy in its
currant form. In the future, the ConCom regulations can adapt should the BOH regulations change. Will work out
Performance Standard language to include no use from 0 -25 feet and from 25 out a soil test will be required.
Motion to Adopt BOH Regulation 75.00 and the BMP. (Glowacki) seconded Carried unanimously
Page 2 of 5
Minutes for April 9, 2013, adopted Oct. 2
B. Invasive Species
Sitting Steinaueq Okmy, Karberg Bennett, Golding, Glowacki
Recused None
Documentation Copy of Town of Nantucket Wetlands Regulations
Public Emily MacKinnon, Resource Ecologist Nantucket Land Council
Kelly Omand, Research Technician/Field Supervisor Nantucket Conservation Foundation and Chair
Invasive Plant Species Committee
Discussion:
Carlson — Have an entire section of the Regulations that discusses invasive species Pan 5 with a list and other
information. It will be important to address procedures and protocols in dealing with them and a list and a criteria to
evaluate whether a plant is invasive or not.
Glowacki — Reminded the commission that he had found information and circulated it to the other commissioners.
Karberg — Have a suggested edit already that could be discussed.
Glowacki — Noticed that there is no definition for invasive species in the ConCom Regulations. The State invasive plant
group does have a definition. A definition needs to be established then a lot needs to be done on the criteria. Had sent
something called The Evaluation of Non-native Species from the State invasive species web site to Mr. Carlson,
which was in turn forwarded to the commissioners. If something is going to be adopted here, it should be done by a
committee large enough to express all viewpoints so that the final product reflects the general consensus. Cited the
fertilizer regulations as a good example of how a group like can create a product easily accepted.
Omand — One recommend made was that the State have an invasive plant list; that is now fully enacted under State law.
That was based upon the Massachusetts Invasive Plant Advisory Group ( MIPAG); the group defined what invasive
was and solicited feedback from landscapers and conservationists, that was about 6 or 7 years ago. The list is now
being reviewed. Most species are on that list.
Glowacki — There is a plant on the state list, Acer pseudoplatanus (Sycamore maple) that doesn't seem to cause a
problem in `Sconset.
Karberg — It spreads.
Glowacki — Asked if someone would show him where the problem in `Sconset is and does anyone advocate removing
the Sycamore Maple trees.
Stchumer — No and that is an important point; what this list was designed for was to make it easier for people to remove
these plants.
Glowacki — Where we start prohibiting planting is another piece of this discussion.
Omand — The MIPAG (Massachusetts Invasive Plants Advisory Group) definition should be added to your regulations.
Uses daffodils as an example of what spreads and is not native but is not invasive due to the way the plant propagates.
There we levels of spreading that help define invasive. Stated that the issue with the Sycamore maples is that there
are alternatives to using them and no more should be planted in Massachusetts. The issue with the Black Pine is that
within 10 years, the top of it is dead and it is spreading throughout natural areas. Do not have a quantifiable definition
but could seek one out; do not think it possible to define all species. Problems arise over time.
Discussion about the pros and cons of rosa rugosa and comparison to rosa multiora and why rasa multiora is
classified highly invasive and rasa rugosa is only classified as potentially invasive.
Omand — Talked about the Japanese black pine (pins thunbergiana) and the problem it causes for coastal areas.
Glowacki — Stated that he had not heard of a viable alternative for black pine as a wind -break or screen.
Karberg — Stated the opinion that there are some habitats it just doesn't belong; a tree should not be planted as a
substitute for a native plant.
Omand — In talking to landscapers, they suggested a large shrub be used for screening or a wind -break rather than a free.
It is not a suitable site for a tree if there is that much wind and salt exposure. Pitch pine is a good alternative to black
pine.
Glowacki — Stated his concern is that ConCom is crossing into an area of using the police power of the state to regulate
what can and cannot be planted.
Steimmer — Black pine is contagious, it spreads, and that is the problem; if it could be kept confined to one property,
then it wouldn't be an issue.
Further debate on the subject of Black pine as highly invasive and the affect it has on the ecology.
Carlson — Invasive species is important enough that it needs to have its own set of regulations and standards. ConCom
should have a list or criteria to work on that can be used to identify lists on Nantucket. It might be time for this board
should have sub - committee that works on invasive species.
Glowacki — Think it makes perfect sense to adopt the State list and to facilitate people's removal of things that are on the
State list; and not get in the way of allowing property owners to do as they wish on their land because a plant is called
a nuisance at the moment. Agree that ConCom needs a definition of what is invasive and needs to adopt a set of
criteria that needs to be worked through the public process. Do not believe ConCom should rely on a third -party
group to do it for us.
Carlson — The problem with using the State list and not adopting criteria for Nantucket is that the State list will not
include things that may be acting as invasive on Nantucket. There are plants here that are invasive but are not
elsewhere in the State.
Page 3 of 5
Minutes for April 9, 2013, adopted Oct. 2
Karberg — There are plants that are showing up in other similar habitats but have not yet appeared on Nantucket.
ConCom needs to have a way to identify a potential problem should someone want to use one of those plants.
Bennett — If it is on the State list, it should not be sold in Massachusetts.
Omand — Pointed out that the MIPAG list is constantly being reviewed to pick up new plants that might become an
issue. As the climate becomes warmer, people are trying new plants and there needs to be a way to keep those plants
from taking over local species.
Oktay arrived and Carlson brought her up to date on the discussion.
Carlson — Suggested arranging for someone from the State to come to Nantucket and talk about the development of the
list and setting up a workshop solely on invasive species and include local experts and other people as well. Also
proposed how an invasive species advisory board might be made up or designate someone from ConCom to be a part
of the existing Invasive Plant Species Committee (IPSC).
Golding — Asked Ms Ormand where the committee was at this time.
Ormand — Stated that the island list was reviewed two years ago. The IPSC did not bring it before ConCom because of
other issues. The list needs to be reviewed again become some plants have become more of a problem since then.
Golding — Suggested accepting the IPSC's recommendations.
Glowacki — Stated cannot accept the work of a non - government group. Acknowledged that ConCom needs to work on a
definition where it doesn't have one for invasive species.
Steinauer — Read from ConCom regulations (page 52), "Invasive plants are those species that spread widely beyond the
location of initial establishment, become locally abundant, or spread into natural areas. Invasive species may cause
net harm to the economy, environment and human health." The regulations go on to list the criteria that makes a plant
an invasive species.
Oktay — Suggested adding a reference to MIPAG 2010 or 2011.
Glowacki — Said that then ConCom or a sub - committee could take local examples and work them through the criteria.
Bennett — The work has been done and argued against duplicating the effort. Stated the opinion that for himself with no
experience in the field to make that decision would make sense.
Glowacki — Contends that the list is politically influenced and pointed to rosa rugosa having been removed under
pressure from the public as an example.
Steinauer— Rosa rugosa was removed from the list because the majority of commissioners disagreed with it being
down - graded from being a highly invasive plant to potentially invasive; so if ConCom is considered a political body
as opposed to a regulator body, then it was a political move.
Oktay — This commission does not encourage people to plant rose rugosa.
Continued debate on the subject and the mutability of the IPSC list.
Carlson — Reiterated the need for ConCom to take a more active role in the continued development of the invasive
species list.
Glowacki — Expressed his dissatisfaction with adopting IPSC list which he perceives as a small representation of
opinions. Stated he is okay with adopting the State list and allowing people to manage their property and wetlands to
remove trees; however he is not okay with dictating what can and cannot be planted on someone's property. He
would not vote in favor of a recommendation to accept the IPSC list. For those things beyond the State list that are
being proposed, would like this commission or some government- appointed entity to work through those criteria and
come up with its own conclusion.
Golding — Stated that he and Mr. Bennett have said little about the list being useless. There is nothing wrong with taking
peoples advice. Willing to defer to IPSC and see no reason for ConCom to give advice and don't see where there
would be bias.
Bennett —There is literature about plants on the IPSC list that are not on the State list; so obviously a knowledgeable
person in the science community has researched these plants and published papers. This is not just a list of plants that
seem to grow in the wrong place.
Carlson — Will extract from State and ConCom definitions, a separate definition and the commission can discuss the
criteria and also work on the three or four species that are of concern to some of the commissioners.
MacKinnon — Coming to an agreement on definition and criteria is definitely an important first step. The way the
regulations are written now, there is a List 1, then List 2 is what Nantucket IPSC recognizes as invasive. Under
Section B Control and Mitigation strategies, it calls out regulating those two lists differently; it states the commission
can grant permission to plant species listed in List 2 under certain circumstances provided that the applicant can
provide substantial evidence that the plants under consideration do not pose enough threat to the resource area in
question. As it is, the regulations don't regulate the species in List 2 as much as those in List 1.
Steinauer— As a marine biologist on this commission, these plants aren't a concern simply because they are plants that
take over other plants; went on to detail the affect of non - native /exotic plants on the eco- system. Stated his belief, that
it is the goal of this commission to protect the biodiversity of wetland system; and a way to do that is to promote
native vegetation over exotic.
Continued discussion about why something is declared an invasive plant.
Carlson — The regulations have to be adopted by June I but the Invasive Species portion can be a work in progress. To
draft
Page 4 of 5
Minutes for April 9, 2013, adopted Oct. 2
III. PUBLIC MEETING
A. Other Business
1. Ratification of Enforcement Orders
a. Congdon property on Tuckemuck— Motion to Reaffirm Enforcement Order discussed at the April
meeting. (Oktay) seconded. Carried unanimously.
b. 20 Medouie Creek — Leads into Waters Edge and the O'Brien residence. All vegetation was cut from the road
to the edge of the vernal pool and removed ail other down -plant material without a permit. Staff —
Recommend issuing the enforcement order to cease and desist. Motion to Issue the Enforcement Order.
(Glowacki) seconded. Carried unanimously.
c. 14 Almanack Pond Road — The entire site was mowed to include through the wetland. Staff — In the process
of confirming the landscaper responsible. As soon as that is done, will bring the order for ratification.
Recommend issuing the enforcement order to cease and desist and commission needs to came up with a way
to fix the damage. Motion to Issue the Enforcement Order. (Glowacki) seconded. Carried 3- 0/Karberg
recused.
d. 47A West Chester Street — Created a parking spot and expanded the driveway into the vegetated wetlands.
Staff— Recommend re- issuing the enforcement order with the amended address. Motion to Re -Issue the
Enforcement Order. (Oktay) seconded. Carried unanimously
3. Commissioners Comment: None
4. Administrator: None
Motion to Adjourn at 5:56 p.m.
Submitted by:
Tony L. Norton
Page 5 of 5